Effectiveness of a nurse-led case management home care model in Primary Health Care. A quasi-experimental, controlled, multi-centre study

Background Demand for home care services has increased considerably, along with the growing complexity of cases and variability among resources and providers. Designing services that guarantee co-ordination and integration for providers and levels of care is of paramount importance. The aim of this study is to determine the effectiveness of a new case-management based, home care delivery model which has been implemented in Andalusia (Spain). Methods Quasi-experimental, controlled, non-randomised, multi-centre study on the population receiving home care services comparing the outcomes of the new model, which included nurse-led case management, versus the conventional one. Primary endpoints: functional status, satisfaction and use of healthcare resources. Secondary endpoints: recruitment and caregiver burden, mortality, institutionalisation, quality of life and family function. Analyses were performed at base-line, and at two, six and twelve months. A bivariate analysis was conducted with the Student's t-test, Mann-Whitney's U, and the chi squared test. Kaplan-Meier and log-rank tests were performed to compare survival and institutionalisation. A multivariate analysis was performed to pinpoint factors that impact on improvement of functional ability. Results Base-line differences in functional capacity – significantly lower in the intervention group (RR: 1.52 95%CI: 1.05–2.21; p = 0.0016) – disappeared at six months (RR: 1.31 95%CI: 0.87–1.98; p = 0.178). At six months, caregiver burden showed a slight reduction in the intervention group, whereas it increased notably in the control group (base-line Zarit Test: 57.06 95%CI: 54.77–59.34 vs. 60.50 95%CI: 53.63–67.37; p = 0.264), (Zarit Test at six months: 53.79 95%CI: 49.67–57.92 vs. 66.26 95%CI: 60.66–71.86 p = 0.002). Patients in the intervention group received more physiotherapy (7.92 CI95%: 5.22–10.62 vs. 3.24 95%CI: 1.37–5.310; p = 0.0001) and, on average, required fewer home care visits (9.40 95%CI: 7.89–10.92 vs.11.30 95%CI: 9.10–14.54). No differences were found in terms of frequency of visits to A&E or hospital re-admissions. Furthermore, patients in the control group perceived higher levels of satisfaction (16.88; 95%CI: 16.32–17.43; range: 0–21, vs. 14.65 95%CI: 13.61–15.68; p = 0,001). Conclusion A home care service model that includes nurse-led case management streamlines access to healthcare services and resources, while impacting positively on patients' functional ability and caregiver burden, with increased levels of satisfaction.

Iron deficiency and anaemia in bariatric surgical patients: causes, diagnosis and proper management

Obesity-induced chronic inflammation leads to activation of the immune system that causes alterations of iron homeostasis including hypoferraemia, iron-restricted erythropoiesis, and finally mild-to-moderate anaemia. Thus, preoperative anaemia and iron deficiency are common among obese patients scheduled for bariatric surgery (BS). Assessment of patients should include a complete haematological and biochemical laboratory work-up, including measurement of iron stores, vitamin B12 and folate. In addition, gastrointestinal evaluation is recommended for most patients with iron-deficiency anaemia. On the other hand, BS is a long-lasting inflammatory stimulus in itself and entails a reduction of the gastric capacity and/or exclusion from the gastrointestinal tract which impair nutrients absorption, including dietary iron. Chronic gastrointestinal blood loss and iron-losingenteropathy may also contribute to iron deficiency after BS. Perioperative anaemia has been linked to increased postoperative morbidity and mortality and decreased quality of life after major surgery, whereas treatment of perioperative anaemia, and even haematinic deficiency without anaemia, has been shown to improve patient outcomes and quality of life. However, long-term follow-up data in regard to prevalence, severity, and causes of anaemia after BS are mostly absent. Iron supplements should be administered to patients after BS, but compliance with oral iron is no good. In addition, once iron deficiency has developed, it may prove refractory to oral treatment. In these situations, IV iron (which can circumvent the iron blockade at enterocytes and macrophages) has emerged as a safe and effective alternative for perioperative anaemia management. Monitoring should continue indefinitely even after the initial iron repletion and anaemia resolution, and maintenance IV iron treatment should be provided as required. New IV preparations, such ferric carboxymaltose, are safe, easy to use and up to 1000 mg can be given in a single session, thus providing an excellent tool to avoid or treat iron deficiency in this patient population.